Wikipedia:Peer review/Hurricane Kathleen (1976)/archive1

Hurricane Kathleen (1976)[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for May 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to know what is needed for this to become a GA, Thanks. Leave Message ,Yellow Evan home , User:Yellow Evan/Sandbox

This is very far from being a GA. There were some issues that had to be brought up to date and a spelling error, but I fixed those. Some things it could use: a storm photograph, more info from Mexico, more info from the Hurricane Newspaper Archive, not all of the references are formatted the same way, and so on. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 22:19, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know how to fix the referencing issue. I have checked the Hurricane Newspaper Archive and searched Google images, but I did not have any luck. Leave Message ,Yellow Evan home , User:Yellow Evan/Sandbox

Finetooth comments: I only have a few minutes, and then I have to dash off to a real-life situation, but I thought I'd post a few quick comments. Here they are:

Orphan paragraphs of one- or two sentences are generally frowned upon in encyclopedia articles. It's better to expand them or merge them with other paragraphs. Ditto for short sections such as "Aftermath".

All of the imperial measures such as rainfall amounts need to be expressed in metric units as well. A handy way to do this is to use the {{convert}} template.

The referencing issue can be dealt with by generally imitating the ones already done here with the "cite family" of templates. You can use copy-and-paste, taking care to fill in the correct data for each citation. For a more complete explanation of how this family works and to see how "cite book" varies from "cite web" and "cite news" and so on, see WP:CIT. Be careful, though, not to confuse the "cite" templates with other families of templates explained on that same page. The citation formatting, as noted by Miss Madeline, must be consistent within a single article.

Except for the lead, a good rule of thumb is to cite a source for every paragraph, every unusual claim, every set of statistics, and every direct quote. Not all of the paragraphs in this article give any source. A statement like "Tropical cyclones bring gale-force winds to the Southwestern United States only rarely" is not common knowledge and must have come from a source. What source?

I hope these few suggestions prove helpful. I'll try to say a bit more later. Finetooth (talk) 18:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Finetooth comment: The article needs copyediting and proofing. I see small errors such as the use of present tense to describe an event in the past. The sudden shift to present occurs in the "Southwest" section: "Residual moisture brings more severe thunderstorms to the state on September 24 and 25. The Tucson area is particularly hard hit with flash flooding and hail as large as golf balls." In the sentence after this, a space should be inserted between the reference number and the first word of the next sentence. Two sentences later, the verb tenses are mixed again ("falling" and "accumulated"), and so on. However, I would suggest making the larger changes before asking someone to help with copyediting. Finetooth (talk) 02:46, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]